This continues from Part 2 (see also Part 1), Prof. Franz Pieper's sermon before the Synodical Conference convention of 1912. — This essay pin-points one of the great differences between the New (English) Missouri (LC-MS) and the Old (German) Missouri. One may trace the dramatic change from the agreement within the Synodical Conference of 1912 to today's LC-MS by the following:
- 1950: Pres. John Behnken published to the Synod Prof. Martin Franzmann's essay Exegesis on Romans 16:17 ff. Although it concluded that “the interpretation traditional in our circles is essentially sound”, yet in its "Conclusion" it distanced itself from the previous understanding in three "nuanced" points.
- 1962: In a National Lutheran Council news release of Oct. 25, 1962, it was reported that the Second Vice-President of the LC-MS, Theo. Nickel, D.D., instructed the American Lutheran Church at its convention in Milwaukee (Confessional Lutheran, v. 23, p. 125): "that insistence on complete agreement in doctrine and practice as necessary for fellowship or even possible in this life 'has its roots in heresy.'"
- 1970: (a) Valparaiso U. president O. P. Kretzmann stated in a letter to the Editor of CHIQ (Nov. p. 189) as one of 44 protesters ("Statement of the 44") against a "traditional interpretation" said "Such a simple little thing as the interpretation of Romans 16:17-18 we had to defend with our very lives."; (b) The difference is perhaps expressed most clearly in a Master of Divinity thesis at Concordia Seminary by John J. Marschausen entitled “Dr. Adolph A. Brux and Prayer Fellowship in The Lutheran Church—Missouri Synod.” The abstract speaks of "... the shift within Synod from a strictly 'scholastic confessionalism' to a more 'evangelical confessionalism'. ... the very real struggle for vision between those sincerely fighting to maintain traditional attitudes and those open to new ways of thinking.'"
Lutheran Church—“Missouri Synod”But now back to the "old paths", the Christian, biblical (not the so-called "scholastic" or "traditional") confessionalism of the Old Missouri — in the concluding Part 3:
"Open to new ways of thinking"
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Opening Sermon (on Ro. 16:17)
Delivered by Dr. F. Pieper.
3. How division is to be removed
Who places at our disposal a means, an effective means, to remove division? Who shows us the way how this offense of division in Christendom can be prevented? The Apostle indicates the means. The means is just as simple as it is thoroughly effective. He says: “Mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to [Ed. alongside of] the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.” If people appear in the Christian Church who teach something other than Christ’s Word and refuse to be instructed, then Christians should not stand with such people, but isolate them, have no fellowship with them, but separate from them. This is to be done in the manner prescribed by God. Had the Christians from the very beginning and of every time obeyed this simple and clear divine instruction, then there would be no division in Christendom, but entire Christendom would be completely united. Where there are no buyers, there is also no market. The Arian division in the Fourth Century would not have originated, if the Christians of that time had submitted to this divine instruction in regard to Arius who denied the eternal deity of Christ, instead of adhering to him. The offense of Rome would not have arisen and would not have spread over the entire world, if the Christians had shunned the pope as an abomination and had given him the true title, instead of calling him “holy father”, who under the name of Christ secured control for himself in the church with his own word. The division at the time of the Reformation would not have occurred, if the Christians had avoided Zwingli and his adherents, who did not continue in the words our Lord Jesus Christ concerning the Lord’s Supper and Baptism. There would be no division in the American [p. 12] Lutheran church, if Christians had kept a distance from the people who bring their own word concerning the (doctrines of the) Christian Church and the Office of the Ministry, concerning conversion and the election of grace. In short, avoiding those who teach other than Christ’s Apostles, that is the simple, certain and effective means prescribed by God to remove division in Christendom. According to God's Word those who teach a different kind of doctrine arise in the Christian Church with God’s permission not for the purpose that one holds himself to them, but for the purpose that one avoids them. How the apostle expressly impresses (this on us): “For there must be also heresies among you, that they which are approved may be made manifest among you” (1 Cor.11:19). This lesson Christians must learn constantly from God's Word. But instead of following this simple and completely effective way prescribed by God, one attempts ways devised by men which only makes evil worse. Especially one seeks the way that one exempts (releases) each other from continuing in all doctrines of God's Word. One calls that unity, what according to God's Word is division!
Against the treatment which is prescribed by God’s Word for those who teach a different doctrine one raises several objections. One says: The people who do not continue in all parts of God's Word, but teach differently, are often still learned, scientific, educated people, concerning whom one also can not deny their honest intentions. One must still however have respect for the knowledge and the earnestness and good will of these people. Respect for those who teach a different doctrine — that is truly an essential sign of our time. This whole view is against God's Word. In vain do we find respect for those who teach a different doctrine in Holy Scripture . What their science and knowledge arrives at, the apostle says thus: “If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing” (1 Tim. 6:3,4). Such a one pretends knowledge of divine things, that he does not even have, and in self deception regards his ignorance as knowledge. And what their noble motives involve, the Apostle in our text says about those who teach a different doctrine the following: “For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly.” In these words it is not being said that in all cases they are coarse gluttons and live in great sins of greed and of the flesh. But it is indeed said in these words that in all cases they do not think of Christ, but of their own selves, they do not want to explain Christ’s Word, but their own opinion, they have not the Christian Church, but their own glory or their own party in mind. The Lord says: “He that speaketh of himself seeketh his own glory” (John 7:18). That is a powerful text that we should all indeed take to heart! Only in so far as someone does not have his own interest, but has Christ’s interest alone and believes His Word, he is also truly and without injustice [hypocrisy, Ed] for Him, that is, he also speaks God’s Word and not his own word.
But is not the avoiding of all those who teach a different doctrine an unattainable, ideal situation? So men judge different than the Apostle. [p. 13] The Apostle does not speak of an unattainable ideal, which is suspended in the mind and remains in the mind, but of a feasible and an accomplished practice, when he admonishes the Christians: “Mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to [Ed. alongside of] the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them”! — Yet one calls out: How can Christians — the simple [Ed. uneducated, plain] Christians — recognize with certainty those who teach a different doctrine and distinguish between truth and error? The simple Christians can do exactly that. Their Saviour, who calls them to continue in His Word, has also given them the means in their hands for this purpose. The Holy Scriptures, the Word of the Prophets and Apostles, is for the Christians not a collection of riddles, but a lamp for their feet and a light for their way. Christians can only then err in their thoughts, in their speech and in their judgment, if they put the light of the Word of God under the bushel. If they use their Light and Right, if they hear and believe what their Lord speaks, then they will know the truth, and the truth will them free from all the slavery of the doctrine of men. The LORD says expressly, that His sheep recognize their Shepherd’s voice. But the voice of the stranger they do not know, but flee before him (John 10:3-5). Let us only remind each other, that we are to let the Word of Christ dwell richly among us, then it also makes the simple wise.
Finally one still objects: But the success! The success of preventing division in this manner is however a very doubtful one. One must despair of success, if one looks at the past and views the present. The success, dear fathers and brethren, is not our matter, but God’s matter, that we this manner which God has prescribed create unity and remove division. Besides we need not ourselves also complain about success. The Synodical Conference has not produced division, but has brought about a gathering together. It has grown steadily in spite of defections (losses) from it, and it is still the most numerous Lutheran church body in the United States. From the very first one has prophesied our downfall. In the last months one has repeated this prophecy. It will not become true. Above all we need to ask God for two things. In the first place for humility. It is not due to our merit, but alone to God’s grace that we do not teach other doctrines [Ed. false doctrines], but that we confess God's Word. Also this humility should be noticeable in everything that we speak and write. Even though we certainly have the sinful flesh in us, yet we should not fight in a fleshly manner. Also we do not want everyone who falls into error occasionally, immediately to be treated as a false teacher. Is it not a miracle, Luther explains, that someone in these high (great) things, which are so foreign to us by nature, sometimes has one’s own thoughts and perhaps blunders (errs) in the words. Luther confesses that for himself, and we will not refrain from the same confession. However we should not give in to our own thoughts, but immediately again seize hold of God’s [p. 14] Word and thereby resist all our own thoughts and all perverse speech. To that end we should in humility help each other. Secondly, we need to ask God for His grace that just as we are to have humble heart, so also we are to testify with clarity and with determination to the doctrine of the Apostles and Prophets and uncover and refuse foreign doctrine. In this way we strive in the right manner for the unity of the Christian Church and for the removal of destructive division. May God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, to whom be the highest praise in eternity, bring that about! Amen.
= = = = = = = = = End of sermon = = = = = = = = =
How was it that I stumbled onto this translation of Pieper's sermon? It was from reading again Prof. Mark Braun's A Tale of Two Synods (p. 209), especially his report of the reprint of Pieper's sermon in the WLS theological journal in 1957. This blog has pointed out serious concerns with the theology of today's WELS, but I must confess that Prof. Braun's book appears to be the best book currently available concerning true 20th century Church History. It seems to be the only history that gives voice to the judgments of the great Prof. Siegbert Becker who left the LC-MS. Braun's history is certainly much better than that of C.S. Meyer, better than August Suelflow or Todd Peperkorn, or... even of Armin Schuetze's work.
==>> To Prof. Braun:
Because of your book (and other readings), many of the supporting documents and publications pertaining to the downfall of the Old Missouri Synod and The Synodical Conference are being uploaded to Archive.org. In particular, your extensive use of the journal The Confessional Lutheran showed a need for its wider availability (and others) and will now be immediately available. Anyone reading this book and interested in reading the actual documents may want to first check availability here.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Of course the doctrines concerning "church fellowship" will always loom large, and today's LC-MS demonstrates that it is in need of true counsel. The father of the Missouri Synod has much to offer it, in the concluding Part 4...
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Of course the doctrines concerning "church fellowship" will always loom large, and today's LC-MS demonstrates that it is in need of true counsel. The father of the Missouri Synod has much to offer it, in the concluding Part 4...
No comments:
Post a Comment
Comments only accepted when directly related to the post.